In Defense of the Law, In Support of this Congress

Day 2,942, 07:40 • Published in USA USA • by Paul Proteus


Good morning Americans, everyone else is writing, so you know, I had to pitch in.

The field of political philosophy is overwhelmingly nasty, brutish, and European. Our contributions as Americans primarily lie in the writings of Madison. Madison describes the danger of factions, of concentrated government, and how a representative democracy can overcome the tyranny not only of the majority, but of the minority as well. These are the ideals enshrined in the US constitution, and the ideals that create the foundation for our in game constitution as well. A separation of powers between the legislature and the executive.

The legislature retains the supreme powers of the purse, and of dictating the nation's laws. In a republican government, Madison argues, "the legislative authority necessarily predominates," while the executive is delegated powers of its own. This separation of powers, essential to Madisonian government, is the roadblock that prevents demagoguery, the shining pillar that supports Democracy from the danger of populism that destroyed the democracies of antiquity. Madison understood this, and yet, over two hundred years later, some of us do not.

The SFP is a faction, as all parties and interests are. Additionally, they are a minority faction, while Gnilraps engendered the support of a plurality, those in the SFP, and those who supported the Coup, are a distinct active minority. Those willing to break the law to force their desires upon this country are a minority, and their actions would be labeled, by Madison, by myself, and by this Congress, as tyranny. Our system is aptly designed to prevent this, in fact it is the underlying goal of our entire system. To imply otherwise is to deny the efficacy of the American system of government, in this game, but outside of it as well.

Now, however, the crisis is somewhat averted and we can discuss this reasonably. We emerge from the chaos in an interesting dilemma. Our President ran on a campaign that was blatantly illegal. He came to the Congress, and the Congress roundly rejected the lifting of the Dictatorship for his term. When he won, his followers were incited, by his tacit support, to break the law en masse. That Congress has up until now refrained from deeming this impeachable is an incredible show of restraint and generosity to our administration. In return one would expect a certain amount of respect and compromise.

Congress has now blacklisted those fought against the United States, those who willfully broke the law, those who published articles from positions of power encouraging citizens to break the law, telling them it was their right, when instead it was a gross violation and abuse of said rights. The administration has done the bare minimum to avoid facing the consequences of these events, reluctantly, following the demands of a Congress unwilling to be led by traitors in the executive, those who broke the law have been removed from government, from the position of Chief of Staff, of Vice President.

And yet the Administration refuses to recognize any serious wrongdoing. Even in removing those who defended and committed sedition, our President has clearly projected the importance of pleasing the SFP party before serving the nation, allowing a Party infrastructure to contribute to the decision making of the executive. Gnilraps has time and time again refused to act as the President to all Americans, instead prioritizing the minority faction that provided his strongest support above everyone else. To Jefferson, we were all Republicans, all Democrats. To Gnilraps, it's clear we're all members of the SFP. Instead, the Administration accuses members of the Congress of demagoguery in defending their actions, instead the Administration insists that receiving 45.65% of the vote is a mandate that perhaps should grant impunity to those who break the law.

Never before has an executive threatened the constitutional powers of the legislative so directly. Gnilraps did not fight in the civil war, but he incited it. Gnilraps did not commit treason, he merely defends the patriotism of those who have. Congress has blacklisted these individuals, not because we wanted to, but because to do otherwise would be to allow that our laws are not actually intended to be followed. That is not the case, and no President can make that otherwise. If any member of this community wishes to rejoin, they may do so, by requesting our Congress remove their blacklist. We tend to be lenient to those who respect the basis of Congressional authority. To those who do not, punishment is necessary, or else our laws lose all meaning, and our word becomes toothless.

I am not calling for an impeachment, I would like to think our President will soon realize his responsibility as all of our Commander in Chief, yet those who do so are not out of line. Our President has knowingly incited a massive display of treason, and, in response, has taken no responsibility, and has instead questioned the judgement of a Congress which has had to deal with the fallout. Our President has done nothing to discourage or condemn an act of defiance to the rule of law in this country, and has instead criticized a Congress forced to do the dirty work of cleaning up after his grand populism.

Having dealt with the fallout of the administration's political subterfuge, we are left wondering, how did the administration, or anyone really, expect this to end?

Gnilraps, you have served this community in the past, but so too was Brutus an honourable man. I would like to see myself proved wrong, reactionary, trigger-happy in criticism, make it so.